Andreas Veithen wrote:
> Asankha,
>
> Let me explain my concern using an example. Imagine that the use case
> is a JMS request-response proxy service and that the requirement is to
> consume the request and to produce the response in a single
> transaction (to guarantee that either there is a response or the
> request remains on the queue). Also imagine that the target endpoint
> uses HTTP. If the non blocking transport is used, then the request and
> response processing will not happen in the same thread, right? This
> means that at some point the transaction needs to be detached from the
> thread processing the request and resumed in the thread processing the
> response. Who is responsible for doing this and how would such a proxy
> definition look like in Synapse?
Andreas, given the transaction does not flow over the HTTP connection,
what's the point of wrapping the HTTP request/response within a
transaction? There's no way to abort the tx for example.
In effect the HTTP interaction has to occur outside the tx right? At that
point, what is the point of putting what happens after the HTTP response
in the same TX as the original one because basically you've lost the
semantic anyway.
I'm prolly getting this wrong .. thanks for your patience in answering it!
Sanjiva.
--
Sanjiva Weerawarana, Ph.D.
Founder & Director; Lanka Software Foundation; http://www.opensource.lk/
Founder, Chairman & CEO; WSO2, Inc.; http://www.wso2.com/
Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/
Visiting Lecturer; University of Moratuwa; http://www.cse.mrt.ac.lk/
Blog: http://sanjiva.weerawarana.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@synapse.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@synapse.apache.org